DOCSLIB.ORG

"Extraterritoriality and Administrative Law"

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Séminaire de droit administratif, européen et global "Extraterritoriality and Administrative Law". Session du 11 avril 2008 Stefano Battini Extraterritoriality: an Unexceptional Exception CONTENTS: I. Introduction - II. The Economic Dimension: Global Markets and Extraterritorial Antitrust Regulation - III. The IT Dimension: Regulating Foreign Internet Content - IV. The Environmental Dimension: Dealing with Transboundary Pollution - V. Regulation without Representation: a New Challenge for Administrative Law I. Introduction In his famous dissenting opinion in the Lotus Case1, Justice Loder linked the strictly territorial effect of national regulation to the principle of sovereignty and thus the mutual independence of States, which is a “postulate” of international law. The “fundamental consequence” of that postulate, according to Loder, “is that no municipal law (..) can apply or have binding effects outside the national territory”. This cornerstone of classical international law2 is mirrored in national public law principles, which traditionally regard the extraterritoriality of domestic regulation as an exception to the opposite rule. In an influential 1895 work, the German scholar Otto Mayer wrote that “notre Etat ne prétend que par exception à exercer son autorité dans la sphère du territoire étranger” (our State claims the right to exercise its authority in a foreign territory only as an exception)3. About fifteen years later, in the United States, Justice Holmes was equally clear in expressing the same concept: “the general and almost universal rule is that the character of an act as lawful or unlawful must be determined wholly by the law of the country where the act is done”4. This sentence is probably the most frequently quoted statement of the “presumption against extraterritoriality”, a long-standing canon of statutory interpretation according to which the “legislation of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States”5. 1 Case of S.S. Lotus (France v. Turkey), Judgment No. 9, Sept 7, 1927, P.C.I.J. Reports 1928, Series A, No 10. 2 See A. L. PARRISH, Reclaiming International Law from Extraterritoriality – Electronic copy available at: http/ssrn.com/abstract=1013740, at. 26. 3 O. MAYER, Deutsches Verwaltungsrecht, Leipzig, 1895-1896. I’m quoting from the French edition: O. MAYER, Le droit administratif allemand, Giard-Briére Editeurs, Paris, 1906, § 62, (Le droit administratif international) p. 354 4 American Banana Co. v. United Fruit Co., 213 U.S. 347, 357 (1909). 5 EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Co. (“Aramco”), 499 U.S. 244, 248 (1991) 6 Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California, 509 US 764 (1993). 7 The reasons for this are well-explained by K. W. DAM, Extraterritoriality in an Age of Globalization: The Hartford Fire Case, 1993 Sup. Ct. Rev. 289 (1993), p. 297: “the core of their concern was their liability to insureds under “occurrence-based” policies, which cover claims with regard to any occurrences during the period in which the policy was in force whenever the claim might later arise. Policies written on occurrence forms therefore subjected the insurers to liability that could not be quantified or even known until years or even decades after the policy had expired. To deal with this problem, the insurers sought to eliminate the occurrence form not just from their own set of forms but for the industry as a whole. They sought to substitute an industry-wide “claims-made” form. Under the latter form the policy covered only claims made during the policy period. Since such a form for newly written policies would otherwise expose them to retroactive and unforeseeable liability with regard to prior occurrences, they included in the claims-made industry form a cut-off date before which no claims would be recognized”. 8 United States v. Aluminium Co. Of Am (“Alcoa”), 148 R 2d 416, 444 (2d Cir. 1945). 9 th Timberlane Lumber Co. V. Bank of Am., 549 F.2d 597, 611-12 (9 Cir. 1976) (Timberlane I). 10 The factors to be balanced are the following: “the degree of conflict with foreign law or policy, the nationality or allegiance of the parties and the locations or principal places of business of corporations, the extent to which enforcement by either state can be expected to achieve compliance, the relative significance of effects on the United States as compared with those elsewhere, the extent to which there is explicit purpose to harm or affect American commerce, the foreseeability of such effect, and the relative importance to the violations charged of conduct within the United States as compared with conduct abroad” (Timberlane I 549 F.2d 597, at 614). In 1987, the Restatement (third) of the Foreign Relations Law of the United States adopted a similar balancing test . The factors to consider include: “(a) the link of the activity to the territory of the regulating state, i.e. the extent to which the activity takes place within the territory, or has a substantial, direct and foreseeable effect upon or in the territory; (b) the connections, such as nationality, residence, or economic activity, between the regulating state and the person principally responsible for the activity to be regulated, or between that state and those whom the regulation is designed to protect; (c) the character of the activity to be regulated, the importance of regulation to the regulating state, the extent to which other states regulate such activities, and the degree to which the desirability of such regulation is generally accepted; (d) the existence of justified expectations that might be protected or hurt by the regulation; (e) the importance of the regulation to the international political, legal or economic system; (f) the extent to which the regulation is consistent with the traditions of the international system; (g) the extent to which another state might have an interest in regulating the activity; and (h) the likelihood of conflict with regulation by another state” (§ 403). 11 Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California, at 796. 12 Id, at 799. 13 M. IVALDI AND O. BERTRAND, European Competition Policy in International Markets (October 2006). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=951594 , at 8-9 14 A Ahlström Osakeytiö and others v Commission, case 89,104, 114, 116, 117, 125, ECR 1988, p 5193. 15 M. IVALDI AND O. BERTRAND, European Competition Policy in International Markets, cit., at 9. 16 M. T. BATZ, A Comparative Analysis of United States and European Union Jurisdiction in Extraterritorial Antitrust Law and The Need for International Standards, Duq Bus L.J. 65 (2007), at. 82. 17 See Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. California, at 820. 18 D.A. SABALOT, Shortening the Long Arm of American Antitrust Jurisdiction: Extraterritoriality and the Foreign Blocking Statutes, 28 Loy. L. Rev. 213 1982. See also Reassessment of International Application of Antitrust Laws: Blocking Statutes, Balancing Tests, and Treble Damages, 50 Law & Contemp. Probs. 197 1987 (stating that “these blocking statutes evidence foreign disdain for American antitrust laws, and are designed to create a disincentive for the extraterritorial reach of U.S. antitrust laws. There are two kinds of blocking statutes: First, there are discovery blocking statutes aimed at preventing compliance with foreign state requests or orders for documents or information. Second, there are judgment blocking provisions that declare unenforceable in whole or in part the decisions or orders of a foreign court purporting to affect foreign nationals”). 19 A. GUZMAN, The Case for International Antitrust, 22 Berkeley J. Int’l L. 355 2004, at 360 (giving an example of the phenomenon: “Suppose [..] the activities of a firm are subject to the competition laws of country A and country B. Assume that country A has, relative to country B, a restrictive policy with respect to horizontal restraints of trade and a permissive policy with respect to vertical restraints [..]. Country B, however, believes that its regime, which is relatively permissive with respect to horizontal restraints but restrictive with respect to vertical restraints, is optimal. Firms subject to the jurisdiction of both states face a de facto regime that includes the strict horizontal restraint regulations of country A and the strict vertical restraint regulations of country B. This is a stricter policy than either country A or country B believes should exist. In short, firms doing business in both the United States and the EU face an international competition policy regime that is more burdensome than the regime of either the EU or United States and very likely more restrictive than what either jurisdiction would choose if it were a closed economy”). 20 E. FOX, National Law, Global Markets and Hartford: Eyes Wide Shut, 68 Antitrust L.J. 73 2000-2001, at 80. 21 TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE DE PARIS, Ordonnance de référé 22 mai 2000, UEJF et Licra c/ Yahoo! Inc. et Yahoo France ; TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE DE PARIS, Ordonnance de référé du 11 août 2000, Association "Union des Etudiants Juifs de France", la "Ligue contre le Racisme et l'Antisémitisme" / Yahoo ! Inc. et Yahoo France ; TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE DE PARIS, Ordonnance de référé 20 novembre 2000, UEJF et Licra c/ Yahoo! Inc. Available at http://www.juriscom.net/txt/jurisfr/cti/tgiparis20000522.htm#texte. 22 Specifically changing its auction policy to prohibit individuals from auctioning “any item that promotes, glorifies or is directly associated with groups or individuals known principally for hateful or violent positions or acts, such as Nazi or the Ku Klux Klan”. 23 Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre Le Racisme et l’Antisémitisme, 145 F. Supp. 2d 1168, 1179 (N.D. Cal. 2001), at. 19, available at http://www.juriscom.net/en/txt/jurisus/ic/dccalifornia20011107.htm . 24 Decision of the Board dated October 27, 1999, SOCAN – Tariff 22 (Transmission of Musical Works to Subscribers Via a Telecommunications Service Not Covered Under Tariff Nos.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Biopolitics and Geopolitics of Border Enforcement in Melilla
    The biopolitics and geopolitics of border enforcement in Melilla By: Corey Johnson and Reece Johnson Johnson, C., & Jones, R. (2018). The biopolitics and geopolitics of border enforcement in Melilla. Territory, Politics, Governance 6(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2016.1236746 This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in Territory, Politics, Governance on 06 October 2016, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/21622671.2016.1236746. ***© 2016 Regional Studies Association. Reprinted with permission. No further reproduction is authorized without written permission from Taylor & Francis. This version of the document is not the version of record. Figures and/or pictures may be missing from this format of the document. *** Abstract: This article uses the multiple and contradictory realities of Melilla, a pene-enclave and -exclave of Spain in North Africa, to draw out the contemporary practice of Spanish, European Union, and Moroccan immigration enforcement policies. The city is many things at once: a piece of Europe in North Africa and a symbol of Spain’s colonial history; an example of the contemporary narrative of a cosmopolitan and multicultural Europe; a place where extraterritorial and intraterritorial dynamics demonstrate territory’s continuing allure despite the security challenges and the lack of economic or strategic value; a metaphorical island of contrasting geopolitical and biopolitical practices; and a place of regional flows and cross-border cooperation between Spain, the EU, and Morocco. It is a border where the immunitary logic of sovereign territorial spaces is exposed through the biopolitical practices of the state to ‘protect’ the community from outsiders.
    [Show full text]
  • The Extraterritorial Application of American Law
    THE EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF AMERICAN LAW: MYTHS AND REALITIES Laurent Cohen-Tanugi February 2015 THE EXTRATERRITORIAL APPLICATION OF AMERICAN LAW: MYTHS AND REALITIES Table of Contents Introduction ..........................................................................................................................................1 I. Extraterritoriality and International Law ......................................................................................2 Extraterritoriality: What Is It All About? .........................................................................................2 The Specificities of American Law ..................................................................................................5 II. Transatlantic Convergence ...........................................................................................................6 The Limitation of Extraterritorial Enforcement in the United States ...............................................7 The Expansion of the Extraterritorial Projection of European Law ...............................................11 III. An Effective Catalyst of the Internationalization of Law ..........................................................15 Extraterritoriality and Globalization ...............................................................................................15 American Leadership in International Economic Law Enforcement .............................................16 From Confrontation to Cooperation ...............................................................................................18
    [Show full text]
  • Extended CFP: Special Territorial Status and Extraterritoriality, Longyearbyen Svalbard, January 20-24 2019
    H-Sport Extended CFP: Special Territorial Status and Extraterritoriality, Longyearbyen Svalbard, January 20-24 2019 Discussion published by Zachary T. Androus on Friday, September 7, 2018 Dear Colleagues, Island Dynamics is now accepting proposal submissions for the interdisciplinary conference Special Territorial Status and Extraterritoriality: Exceptional Sovereignties and Sovereign Exceptions, to be held in Longyearbyen, Svalbard, January 20-24, 2019, the world's only visa- free zone and its northernmost inhabited territory. In addition to an engaging conference program, delegates will also be able to enjoy a dogsled excursion into the polar night and a guided visit to a historical Russian mining operation. The deadline for proposing a presentation is September 30, 2018. To submit a proposal and for registration information, please visit www.islanddynamics.org/extraterritoriality2019.html. While sport is not mentioned specifically in the call, the topic intersects with sport practices in a number of important ways and proposals addressing any of them are welcome. Call for Proposals: Territorially based sovereign states are commonly presented as the basic, fundamental units of the international political world system, and they clearly represent powerful, even dominant, forces in global institutions of governance. But the world is also replete with myriad cases that defy the presumed logic of state sovereignty as the elemental operating unit of the global political system. Certain contexts for extraterritorial legal jurisdiction over individuals or places, and the corresponding immunity from local laws, are well-established in international relations practice regarding diplomatic and military installations and personnel. Extraterritoriality can be conceptually expanded to effectively address a range of other ways in which particular territories, institutions, and individuals are subject to exceptional forms of political, legal, and existential status.
    [Show full text]
  • The Holy See (Including Vatican City State)
    COMMITTEE OF EXPERTS ON THE EVALUATION OF ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING MEASURES AND THE FINANCING OF TERRORISM (MONEYVAL) MONEYVAL(2012)17 Mutual Evaluation Report Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism THE HOLY SEE (INCLUDING VATICAN CITY STATE) 4 July 2012 The Holy See (including Vatican City State) is evaluated by MONEYVAL pursuant to Resolution CM/Res(2011)5 of the Committee of Ministers of 6 April 2011. This evaluation was conducted by MONEYVAL and the report was adopted as a third round mutual evaluation report at its 39 th Plenary (Strasbourg, 2-6 July 2012). © [2012] Committee of experts on the evaluation of anti-money laundering measures and the financing of terrorism (MONEYVAL). All rights reserved. Reproduction is authorised, provided the source is acknowledged, save where otherwise stated. For any use for commercial purposes, no part of this publication may be translated, reproduced or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic (CD-Rom, Internet, etc) or mechanical, including photocopying, recording or any information storage or retrieval system without prior permission in writing from the MONEYVAL Secretariat, Directorate General of Human Rights and Rule of Law, Council of Europe (F-67075 Strasbourg or [email protected] ). 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. PREFACE AND SCOPE OF EVALUATION............................................................................................ 5 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.......................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Extraterritoriality
    DEVELOPMENTS IN THE LAW EXTRATERRITORIALITY “The district courts shall have original jurisdiction of any civil action by an alien for a tort only, committed in violation of the law of nations or a treaty of the United States.” Alien Tort Statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1350 (2006). “We assume that Congress legislates against the backdrop of the pre- sumption against extraterritoriality.” EEOC v. Arabian Am. Oil Co., 499 U.S. 244, 248 (1991). “[T]he number of U.S. lawsuits where American laws are applied extraterritorially to solve global problems has grown. This trend, how- ever, is not peculiar to the United States. Increasingly other countries are also applying their laws extraterritorially to exert international in- fluence and solve transboundary challenges.” Austen L. Parrish, Reclaiming International Law from Extraterritoriality, 93 MINN. L. REV. 815, 818 (2009) (footnote omitted). “The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner incon- sistent with the Purposes of the United Nations.” U.N. Charter art. 2, paras. 1, 4. 1226 2011] DEVELOPMENTS — EXTRATERRITORIALITY 1227 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 1228 II. IMPLICATIONS OF EXTRATERRITORIALITY IN THE ALIEN TORT STATUTE .... 1233 A. Introduction ....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Child's Best Interests and Religion: a Case Study of the Holy
    This chapter has been accepted for publication and will appear in a revised form, subsequent to appropriate editorial input by Cambridge University Press, in Implementing Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Best Interests, Welfare and Well-being published by Cambridge University Press. 'The Child’s Best Interests and Religion: A Case Study of the Holy See’s Best Interests Obligations and Clerical Child Sexual Abuse', in Implementing Article 3 of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child: Best Interests, Welfare and Well-being, ed. EE Sutherland, L-A Barnes Macfarlane, 2016, © Cambridge University Press. URL: http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/law/un-and-international- organisations/implementing-article-3-united-nations-convention-rights-child-best-interests-welfare-and-well- being?format=HB The Child’s Best Interests and Religion: A Case Study of the Holy See’s Best Interests Obligations and Clerical Child Sexual Abuse IOANA CISMAS A Introduction Does religion and belief carry any relevance for the child’s best interests? The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child (hereafter, the Committee) provides indicia in General Comment 14. Therein, the treaty body stipulates that in assessing a child’s best interests, the right to preserve her identity as guaranteed by the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC) in article 8 must be taken into consideration; whereby religion and beliefs, form part of a child’s identity.1 Thus, in considerations related to foster home and placement for a child, adoption, separation of parents and divorce, for instance, the assessment of the child’s best interests should pay due regard to the ‘desirability of continuity in a child’s upbringing and to the child’s … religious… background’.2 Yet, the relation between religious interpretations and the child’s best interests proves to be much more complex.
    [Show full text]
  • The Euro-Atlantic Integration and the Future of Kaliningrad Oblast
    NATO EURO-ATLANTIC PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL INDIVIDUAL RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPS 2000 - 2002 PROGRAMME THE EURO-ATLANTIC INTEGRATION AND THE FUTURE OF KALININGRAD OBLAST by Česlovas Laurinavičius Vilnius - 2002 1 CONTENT Abstract 3 Aim of the Research 4 Methodology 8 1. Main tendencies of Russia’s foreign policy after the collapse of the Soviet Union 9 2. NATO enlargement and Kaliningrad 11 2.1. Military transit of the Russian Federation through the territory of the Republic of 13 Lithuania: historic and political science profile 2.2. Circumstances of the Soviet military withdrawal from the Republic of Lithuania: 15 Negotiations Process 2.3. 1994-1995 negotiations between Vilnius and Moscow over military transit 18 agreement 2.4. Regulation of the military transit of the Russian Federation through the territory of 27 Lithuania and its practical execution 2.5. Intermediate conclusion 29 3. The impact assessment of the EU enlargement on the Kaliningrad oblast 30 3.1. Relations between Moscow and Kaliningrad 30 3.2. The trends of the social, economical and political development in the Kaliningrad 35 oblast of the Russian Federation 3.3. The EU acquis communautaire, the applicant countries and Kaliningrad: issue 37 areas 3.4. Perspectives of the crisis prevention 45 Conclusions 50 2 ABSTRACT The collapse of the Soviet Union has given impetus to the debate about the future of the Kaliningrad Oblast (KO) of the Russian Federation. The main cause for this is the fact that concrete exclave of the Russian Federation – which is the country’s westernmost outpost – has been left cut off from Russia by Lithuania and Poland and surrounded by countries that are orienting themselves toward the European Union and NATO.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Presumption Against Extraterritoriality Contents
    THE NEW PRESUMPTION AGAINST EXTRATERRITORIALITY William S. Dodge CONTENTS INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1583 I. A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE PRESUMPTION ................................................................. 1589 A. Nineteenth Century: International Law Origins ........................................................ 1589 B. 1909 –1949: From International Law to International Comity and Congressional Intent ....................................................................................................... 1591 C. 1950 –1989: Falling into Disuse .................................................................................... 1595 D. 1991: The Presumption Reborn ..................................................................................... 1597 II. THE NEW PRESUMPTION ................................................................................................ 1603 A. Morrison’s Focus Approach............................................................................................ 1604 B. RJR Nabisco’s Two-Step Framework ............................................................................ 1608 C. The Scope of the Presumption ....................................................................................... 1614 1. Substantive Statutes .................................................................................................. 1614 2. Causes of Action .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Presumptions Against Extraterritoriality in State Law
    Presumptions Against Extraterritoriality in State Law William S. Dodge* For the past three decades, the federal presumption against extraterritoriality has been the principal tool that the U.S. Supreme Court has used to determine the geographic scope of federal statutes. But the federal presumption does not apply to state statutes, the scope of which is a question of state law. Descriptively, this Article surveys the presumptions against extraterritoriality found in state law. Twenty states currently apply such presumptions to state statutes, and those presumptions sometimes differ from their federal counterpart. Nearly as many states have rejected a presumption against extraterritoriality and determine geographic scope using ordinary tools of statutory interpretation. In other states, the status of a state presumption is unclear. Normatively, this Article argues that states do not need presumptions against extraterritoriality because every state has conflicts rules to determine questions of priority when a case falls within the laws of more than one jurisdiction. State presumptions can also create confusion about how they fit with other conflicts rules and create inconsistency among state statutes and with state common law. Finally, this Article argues that state presumptions are not necessary to avoid conflict with foreign law in international cases. * Copyright © 2020 William S. Dodge. Martin Luther King, Jr. Professor of Law and John D. Ayer Chair in Business Law, University of California, Davis, School of Law. My thanks to Pamela Bookman, John Coyle, Katherine Florey, Maggie Gardner, Stephen Sachs, Aaron Simowitz, Guy Struve, Symeon Symeonides, and Christopher Whytock for comments, suggestions, and insights, and to Lavneet Dhillon for outstanding research assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 1 Extraterritoriality: the U.S. Perspective
    CHAPTER 1 Extraterritoriality: The U.S. Perspective Use of the casebook for educational purposes with attribution is available on a royalty-free basis under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License, available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by- sa/3.0/us/. For all other uses please contact Professor Spencer Weber Waller at [email protected] . Section 1 of the Sherman Act provides that “Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is hereby declared to be illegal.” A violation of Section 1 is a felony, requiring punishment, upon conviction, by fines not to exceed $100,000,000 for a corporation, “or, if any other person, $1,000,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding ten years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.” Section 2 of the Sherman Act is directed at monopolies. As with Section 1, “Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize, or combine or conspire with any other person or persons, to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by fine not exceeding $ 10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other person, $ 350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years, or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.” This chapter looks at the application and jurisdictional reach of the Sherman Act to foreign actors, as well as conduct that has taken place outside of the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • Everyday Geographies of the Enclaves in India and Bangladesh
    Durham E-Theses Life, the Law and the Politics of Abandonment: Everyday Geographies of the Enclaves in India and Bangladesh SHEWLY, HOSNA,JAHAN How to cite: SHEWLY, HOSNA,JAHAN (2012) Life, the Law and the Politics of Abandonment: Everyday Geographies of the Enclaves in India and Bangladesh, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5898/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 Life, the Law and the Politics of Abandonment: Everyday Geographies of the Enclaves in India and Bangladesh This PhD strives to understand what roles politico-spatial-legality play in shaping everyday life in the enclaves located in the northwest borderland curve in the India-Bangladesh border. Conceptually and legally, an enclave is a fragmented territory of one sovereign power located inside another sovereign territory. Following the decolonisation process in 1947, both India and Pakistan/Bangladesh inherited more than 200 enclaves.
    [Show full text]
  • Speech Beyond Borders: Extraterritoriality and the First Amendment Anna Su
    Vanderbilt Law Review Volume 67 | Issue 5 Article 3 10-2014 Speech Beyond Borders: Extraterritoriality and the First Amendment Anna Su Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr Part of the First Amendment Commons Recommended Citation Anna Su, Speech Beyond Borders: Extraterritoriality and the First Amendment, 67 Vanderbilt Law Review 1373 (2019) Available at: https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/vlr/vol67/iss5/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. It has been accepted for inclusion in Vanderbilt Law Review by an authorized editor of Scholarship@Vanderbilt Law. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Speech Beyond Borders: Extraterritoriality and the First Amendment Anna Su* Does the FirstAmendment follow the flag? In Boumediene v. Bush, the Supreme Court categoricallyrejected the claim that constitutional rights do not apply at all to governmental actions taken against aliens located abroad. Instead, the Court made the application of such rights, the First Amendment presumably included, contingent on "objective factors and practicalconcerns." In addition, by affirming previous decisions, Boumediene also extended its functional test to cover even U.S. citizens, leaving them in a situationwhere they might be without any constitutional recourse for violations of their First Amendment rights. But lower courts have found in the recent case of USAID v. Alliance for Open Society ("USAID") an implicationthat free speech rights exist abroad,at least by U.S. registered entities or U.S. citizens. This Article resolves this doctrinal ambiguity, arguing courts should recognize that the First Amendment covers speech made beyond U.S.
    [Show full text]